Skip to main content

Waaahhh!!! says Brian De Palma

He says:

So now it's all over the web that I'm a left-wing wacko traitor who should be horsewhipped.

But of course, horsewhipping was a delusional idea that you could educate a horse by beating it. This is twice as delusional for De Palma, who could not be educated if you could poor knowledge into his oh so left ear.

Mr. De Palma, you are a left-wing wacko. Embrace your reality, it'll make things more understandable.

He's whining that his cinematic turd, Redacted, has bombed everywhere it's been shown except at left-wing wacko film festivals. Fair enough, it's easy to understand how a person could be upset at their latest "art" project being created by empty theatres. But how do you explain...

According to De Palma, the pent-up anger of the US forces in Iraq is worse than that of the troops who served in Vietnam, there, he says, at least US soldiers had brothels to visit in order to let off steam. "This is not the way the army likes to see itself portrayed," he adds. "They want to be seen the way the administration portrays them: valiant people over there creating democracy – all that mumbo jumbo." More importantly, De Palma sees the film as a critique of how American audiences are fed propaganda by the US news media. "They sit there and watch their television screens, and see these embedded reporters and infomercials from Iraq, and how well things are going over there, and they think that's the truth."

Apparently I watch different networks from Mr. De Palma, because I see all the things he says I don't see. Are his eyes still functioning? Maybe the problem resides somewhere deeper within his skull. Maybe that could be the subject of a new film, The Search for De Palma's Brain.

I know, I know, ad hominem attacks should be avoided, but that bit about troops having pent-up anger because they can't buy any hookers is such a crock. And it is oh so telling when he says "creating democracy - all that mumbo jumbo." Yes, Mr. De Palma, you are a left-wing wacko traitor. It must hurt to have the truth come out.

Poor, pitiful, clueless, multi-millionaire filmmaker. Maybe I should send him a box of Kleenex.

(HT: Libertas.)

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

John Wick: Chapter 4

No sense in playing coy, this is a great film. I’ve seen it twice and while I don’t quite love it in the way I love the first, original John Wick , it’s my #2. It’s a little overlong, has some wasted space and time, has one absolutely pointless and useless character, and generally ignores the realities of firefights, falling, getting shot, hit, etc. All that notwithstanding, it’s a great action flick, has a genuine emotional core, and is well worth your time if you’re into that sort of thing. Like I am. Summary: John Wick (Keanu Reeves), last seen saying he was fed up with the High Table, goes to war to obtain his freedom. Some of the most incredible action scenes ever filmed ensue, culminating in a very satisfactory finale and a devastating post-credit scene. The first Wick film was a surprise hit. It was a simple, straight-forward tale of vengeance told in a simple, straight-forward manner. Where it stood out was its devotion to human stunt work, on exploiting long camera shots that ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Not the Hero We Deserve, But the Hero We Need

The Dark Knight is the best film I’ve seen in years. Not just the best “superhero” film, but the best film of any type. It’s not perfect, not quite a masterpiece, but it’s flaws are, to me, tiny and overwhelmed by the time the film ends. While relatively bloodless, it is consistently brutal, not just in what it depicts but in the themes that drive it. TDK is a film for adults, please leave the kids at home. Let’s deal with those “flaws” first, the largest being the character Rachel Dawes . In Batman Begins , I blamed Katie Holmes . Her acting was weak, to say the least, which is regrettable in that who she is and what she says and does are important to the film. Critics agreed and either for that or other reasons, Katie was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal , who is a better actress. Yet here she’s weak, real weak. Maybe it’s the character, not the actress, which is frustrating because Rachel is a pivotal character. The film,...
1 comment
Read more

Dune Part 2 (2024)

I have come not to praise Dune but to bury it. I am in a distinct minority. So be it. To explain why, there will be some minor spoilers ahead; sorry. The short version is #NotMyDune. Summary: Picking up where Dune Part 1 left off, we find the young Paul Atreides (Timothée Chalamet) hanging out with the Fremen. Plots to overthrow rival houses and empires ensue. Go here to see what I thought about Dune Part 1 (2021) . Overall, I found it to be technically brilliant, but lacking a human heart, an exercise in frenetic slow motion. D2 is more of the same, though with far more action. Acting-wise, everyone is doing a fine, more than adequate job. Absolutely no one or nothing stands out. The way the characters are written (adapted, actually), their back and forths and interactions, are all weak and unengaging. I generally hate when they speak. I've read the novel a ridiculous number of times, and these films are prompting me to read it again. I understand that trying to translate the n...
1 comment
Read more